Mamiya C220

[jgcull]

I've found this for sale:

"MAMIYA C220 professional camera, medium format, used mostly for weddings, great for outdoors also...asking $125.00...."

I have a Hasselblad and I like it. I like that it's weighty... well, except that I can't shoot handheld well. I like that it's fully manual, and I like the clunk of the shutter. I don't move fast with it, though. I don't like that so much.

What can you tell about this Mamiya, in comparison? He says it's in excellent shape.

Thanks so much!

Janet

 

[noblebeast]

The Mamiya is a TLR so it is bigger than a Hassy, probably weighs more (I haven't compared them), so from what you've said you won't like it very much.

The Mamiya TLRs have excellent lenses (one of the only - if not THE only - TLRs that one can change the lens on), are fully manual and tend to be built to last forever (hence the weight). Portability and fast action are not their primary advantage though.

That's a good price if it comes with at least the 80mm lens. If there is no lens, then I personally would want the body to be in near-mint condition, just because there are a lot of these out there so the picken's are not slim.

Joe

 

[AZLF]

Well it's a interchangeable lens tlr with copal shutters so there is a lot less "clunking" going on. The Mamiya's lenses are very good but I doubt they compares equally with what you already have. I've owned three of the Mamiyas and found them to be a good solid camera.

 

[Anscojohn]

It's a lot easier to hand hold at slower speeds than "Blad the Impaler" because there is no big mirror to slap. Lenses do not compare, but they are more than adequate for professional quality work. The 220 is simpler than the 330. Hard to go wrong at that price, with lens, if all is in very good working condition. My two cents.

John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

 

[fschifano]

I have both a Hasselblad and a coule of Mamiya C220s. Both have excellent glass, though I'm sure there will be arguments that the Mamiya glass is not as good as the Zeiss glass used for the 'blad. I don't know. They both look very good to me. The 80mm lens for the Mamiya is damned good. With no moving mirror, and only a leaf shutter, it's fairly easy to get a good shot at 1/15th sec. with the Mamiya. Can't do that with the Hasselblad. The Mamiya has bellows which allows for very close focusing, though you do need to be mindful of parallax error and exposure compensation when working very close in. Fortunately, the Mamiya has a little scale on the focusing rack indicating how much more exposure to allow for this. All in all, if it comes with a lens, grab it. You won't be sorry, and if you don't like it you can always re-sell it.

 

[Paul Howell]

Unless you you want interchangable lens go with a Rolli or Yashica 124. I have a couple of 6X6 SLRs as well as a Mamyia Unviersal, after lugging SLR around for a couple of months I packed up my Yashica D for a day in the desert so much lighter.

 

[mgb74]

A few other points:

The 220 does not automatically cock the shutter when you advance the film. You do that in 2 separate operations. But it also weighs a bit less than the C330 series. My C330 certainly weighs more than my 500C.

If it doesn't come with a lens, it's not that great a deal. If it does, be aware that the earlier chrome lenses with the Seikosha shutter do not have parts generally available. The later "black" lens with a Seiko shutter don't have this issue.

If it functions well now, has a "black" lens with Seiko shutter, and the shutters works OK, I agree with the prior poster that you can't go wrong.

Many of the older Mamiya TLRs used in weddings have seen a lot of use. Could be an issue with the wind mechanism. But it may also have been a backup with relatively little use.

One advantage with a TLR is for formal and informal portraiture. With the viewing lens separate from the taking lens, you never lose the view of the subject.

 

[MattKing]

I have had a C330 for about 30 years, and I picked up a mint C220 body about 4 years ago. I also have a selection of accessories (prism finder, paramender, filters, etc.) that probably enhance my use of the cameras.

The 220 is a bit smaller, and definitely lighter than the C330, but you lose the benefit of automatic shutter cocking.

The "used mostly for weddings" would give me some concern, as that could mean it and its lens(es) were used a lot, and used hard. I'd check it carefully for signs of abuse/damage, but if there are problems, they should be relatively easy to detect. My C330 has seen a fair number of weddings, and it isn't as pretty as it once was, but it has never needed any repair.

Make sure that the lens with it is a black body lens. The older, chrome lenses are good quality, but the shutters are a bit older, and if they go wrong, they are harder to get repaired.

The 80mm lenses are excellent. I have and use one happily, but I find that my favorite kit is the 135mm lens plus either the 65mm, or the 55mm.

The bellows means that close-up work is easy, provided that you learn how to deal with parallax (tripod and paramender the best way to go).

There is no depth of field preview (unless you have a relatively rare version of the 105mm lens that I've read and heard about, but never actually seen).

The site to check for Mamiya TLR info is Graham Patterson's site linked below. He posts regularly here on APUG under grahamp (IIRC).

Dead Link Removed

If you check my gallery here on APUG, you will see a few shots I took using my C220, including "Ropes", "Fall Foliage" and the shot I posted last night, "Mud, Glorious Mud".

I find I can carry the camera and two lens kit and a meter and some film in a very compact and reasonably light bag (noting however that my longest lens is the 135mm). I can squeeze my C330 body into the same bag, with the same lenses, but it is a bit of a squeeze.

In recent years I've expanded my MF choices with both Mamiya 645 SLR equipment and Koni-Omega 6x7 equipment, but I still like the results from my Mamiya TLRs.

The TLRs would probably be great for IR film too, but I haven't tried it.

Hope this helps.

Matt

 

[jovo]

Portability and fast action are not their primary advantage though.

C220s were used extensively in their day for hotel "table" shots, weddings, and lots of candid work. In fact, the collapsible hood opens in the front as a "sport finder" and adapts to the 135mm lens as well as the 80mm. The thing to also acquire to make that work best is the attachable grip holder (there's one for sale at KEH for $45 that's listed as being in Ex condition) that also has a flash shoe (though not a hot shoe). The leaf shutter is quiet, and offers no discernible vibration.

 

[Mark Fisher]

I had a C220 and now have a Hasselblad. The C220 is about the same size, but weighs less. The Mamiya lens is OK, but not as good as the Zeiss. A 3 lens C220 kit is much smaller and lighter than a 3 lens Hassy kit. I'd bet that you would get sharper handheld shots with the C220 due to the lack of mirror. Lastly, you really can get away with a small tripod with the C220...again due to lack of mirror. If I did any hand held medium format work, I'd probably get another C220 or C330.

 

[jgcull]

I'm posting these pictures for you to see, then I'll back up and read all your replies. Thanks for posting. I'm trying to justify the bucks for another camera. (Maybe while I'm working through it he'll drop a little more off the cost. Maybe I'm the only one looking.)

 

[Jersey Vic]

I bought a 220 so I could get a high quality 55mm MF lens for a good price and was pleasantly surprised by the small size and weight of this camera. Theres also an excellent 180mm lens and 16 inch prints I made from negs taken with the 80mm are sharp as can be.

 

[fschifano]

If that's the camera for sale, be advised that it is equipped with the 55mm lens set. That's pretty wide on 6x6, so just be aware of what you're getting. An 80mm lens set won't set you back too much though, if you're of a mind to get one. Eventually, you might want to look for the 105 mm or 135 mm lens set to round out the rig. The 135 mm is great for protraiture, and the 105 is only slightly long and can be used very successfully for general photography.

 

[jgcull]

>>>it is equipped with the 55mm lens set. That's pretty wide on 6x6<<<

Yes, it is, and I don't know if I can justify going after more lenses for yet another camera. I may just tame myself on this one, though the body looks mighty interesting to me!

 

[MattKing]

>>>it is equipped with the 55mm lens set. That's pretty wide on 6x6<<<

Yes, it is, and I don't know if I can justify going after more lenses for yet another camera. I may just tame myself on this one, though the body looks mighty interesting to me!

The 55mm lens is a very useful lens, and relatively expensive. You may very well be able to sell it for the $125.00, if it is in reasonable shape.

An 80mm lens would likely be cheaper.

Many here might be willing to buy the kit for the lens itself. The body looks good too.

Matt

 

[mgb74]

From looks alone, that's an excellent deal. If you don't want the wide (55mm) lens, it should be quite easy to trade it for an 80mm plus cash to boot. You could end up with a $75 C220 (including the 80mm lens).

 

[grahamp]

A decent 55mm is probably worth the price alone. Maybe cheaper than an equivalent focal length for the 'blad if you don't have one already. For a weight comparison, see http://www.gapatterson.org/mfaq/m_faq-11.html#Heading141
The main thing is that it is a TLR with all the good and bad points that implies.

 

[mikeg]

That looks a great deal. I don't know what they go for in the US but here in the UK the 55mm lens often goes for the equivalent of over US$200.

 

[noblebeast]

With the 55mm for $125? Buy it now!

Joe

 

[k_jupiter]

No question about it. I have a c220 with a 65 and love it. $125 for a working c220 and a 55?

You don't want it? Send it my way.

tim in san jose

 

[jgcull]

I sent an e-mail to him Monday night, indicating my interest, and again yesterday telling him I want it. I haven't heard anything back from him. I think he told me on the phone it was his grandfather's camera. Or his dad's. We'll see.

If I've missed it, I won't cry. I'm struggling a bit with putting out the money... we're waiting for 2 houses to sell. Anybody want a house with acreage?

 

[k_jupiter]

I sent an e-mail to him Monday night, indicating my interest, and again yesterday telling him I want it. I haven't heard anything back from him. I think he told me on the phone it was his grandfather's camera. Or his dad's. We'll see.

If I've missed it, I won't cry. I'm struggling a bit with putting out the money... we're waiting for 2 houses to sell. Anybody want a house with acreage?

I'll trade ya c220 with 65mm lens for it. Heck, I'll throw in a 135mm and a 180mm if the property is nice.

tim in san jose

 

[jgcull]

The property is nice... but no deal. Hey, but thanks!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I had a C330 with the 65mm, 80mm, 250mm lenses and the paraminder [corrects for parallax]. I found the fiddle factor too great ... is this the lens that automatically cocks, cocking the shutter, ... the human engineering and ergonomics are non-existant. I finally got fed up with the C330 and brought a Hasselblad [an 'asselblad?] with the 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, and the 250mm and have never regretted either getting rid of the C330 or getting the Hasselblad. The Hasselblad is like a large 35mm in handling.

See if you can find a C220 or C330 in a store to rent an try it out. YMMV.

Steve

 

[k_jupiter]

I had a C330 with the 65mm, 80mm, 250mm lenses and the paraminder [corrects for parallax]. I found the fiddle factor too great ... is this the lens that automatically cocks, cocking the shutter, ... the human engineering and ergonomics are non-existant. I finally got fed up with the C330 and brought a Hasselblad [an 'asselblad?] with the 50mm, 80mm, 150mm, and the 250mm and have never regretted either getting rid of the C330 or getting the Hasselblad. The Hasselblad is like a large 35mm in handling.

See if you can find a C220 or C330 in a store to rent an try it out. YMMV.

Steve

Ya know.. I have sometimes thought the same thing with the C220... but damn does it take nice pictures, especially with the 65mm lens.

I now shoot mostly with an rb67... just as heavy but a lot more ergonomic.

And the lens are just as good as the Zeiss but 1/4 the cost. *L*

tim